The head of the Central Executive Committee of United Russia's Andrei Vorobyov proposed to introduce in Russia the compulsory insurance of private households. He believes that the measure "could actually protect citizens from the material damage in case of fire. According to preliminary calculations, Vorobyev said, this type of insurance will cost homeowners in the 500-600 rub. month. "I understand that this is a lot, especially for retirees. For certain categories may be easing, but this topic should be discussed", - the politician believes.
Tatiana Puchkova, deputy director of the company AlfaStrakhovanie:
- Let us remember that the USSR existed compulsory insurance houses, cottages, villas, hozpostroek, sheds, barns, saunas, garages, and even fences that are in rural areas, urban workers and suburban towns. Insured were the citizens who belong to the structure of the rights of private property. State insurance authorities to determine the amount of insurance payments for each of the terms established by the Ministry of Finance, made allowance for these buildings. The property of citizens deemed to be insured from the moment of its arrival at the farm and before departure (for example, because of the death or sale). Citizens have made insurance payments by the deadlines set by the Government. At the same time were added to the current payments of arrears on payments for past years and fine for the entire period of delay. In general, these conditions have been directed to the full satisfaction of the material interests of policyholders.
Personally, I believe that such insurance should be revived. After the death of a dwelling house, where he is the only place to stay for the family, causing extreme damage to the family in which she can not do without assistance. And the state has to provide material assistance, as it happened and now. Compulsory insurance not only protects against the huge risk of damage, which itself can not yet handle most of our population, but also increases the responsibility of citizens for the preservation of the property.
Alexander Rappoport, managing partner at the law firm "Rappoport and Partners:
- In my opinion, compel man to do whatever was beyond his control should be only in those cases where there may be threats to the interests of third parties. That is why, in particular, should be compulsory insurance source of increased danger, such as a car, in case of injury to anyone else. And in respect of each property itself should count their own risks and make a decision, he needed insurance or not. Otherwise, the compulsory insurance would only be an additional trough for insurance companies. By the way, the Western practice is precisely on this path. In particular, in America, compulsory insurance of property, including housing, exist only in case of injury to a third party. A fire insurance is always voluntary. I'm afraid, in this case, our government is trying to shift its responsibility to citizens.